Bell Potter Conference Up dates?, page-154

Reg, once again, you are not being specific enough and so are losing the point. And I believe missing out on doing something in your own interest to do.

It is not possible for either I or otherperpesctive to alter matters of fact like whether there is a patent GRANTED by the US patent office or not that covers what he alleges it covers.

The point is reg, that even you can, and I would argue even you should, care about what is true about whether a patent alleged to have been granted or merely applied for actually exists or not.

And you should have (or invest a small amount of time to learn by going to the USPTO website) the research skills to find out - whether a patent exists or not or is granted or not.

And you should have the financial incentive in holding stocks to want to know what MSB is including in their patent applications (what I cited was definately at least an application - I say it wasn't granted - but it definately relates and includes details on MSBs thinking about potency assays - and I've already posted a figure from the patent application and compared it to one from ODAC period MSB presentations and shown that the number of data points in both is the same - the pattern of data points spread is the same but the p value is different between the two) - so you should have both the capability to check and a financial incentive to do so so far as I can see.